Oh sure, agreed, you shouldn't have to fight like that.

I'm not in any way defending them taking your money for a service that was not then delivered. By 'quality' letter, I meant that it was at least articulate and had been carefully considered.

But on reflection .......this won't be the first time they have rejected a claim from someone in a very similar situation, so I guess the wording was - to some extent - based on previous responses.